TIII team: Presentation final event [CUO]
-
Upload
industrial-design-center -
Category
Technology
-
view
76 -
download
0
description
Transcript of TIII team: Presentation final event [CUO]
TIII CLOSING EVENT18 September 2014
Jorick Vissers David Geerts
AGENDA
• WP 2.1 Sota study existing labs
• WP 2.5 Development of a TUI UX evaluation method
• WP 4.3 Supervising student cases with companies/organisations
• WP 5.3 Giving workshops, seminars for the development of TIII
• WP 5.1 Publications
WP 2.1 SOTA LABS
WP 2.1 SOTA LABS2 objectives:
• What approaches do existing organisations/labs use for sustainability?
• Where should the TIII lab conjoin or complement?
Labs within the 4 domains of TIII:
1. FabLabs (shape + technology)
2. UX labs + consultancies (User)
3. Living Labs (user, software, technology)
4. Research groups
5. Other
WP 2.1 SOTA LABS
Questions per lab:
• What are they doing?
• What is their focus?
• Which approach/method do they use?
• Infrastructure
• Who do they work for?
• Forms of income
WP 2.1 SOTA LABSConlusions
Inclusion of existing FabLabs in the TIII network
Accessible UX labs are rather limited
2 options:
• Creating a TIII UX lab
• Hiring UX expert to utilise the limited accessible UX labs
Living labs seem profitable, but are limited and confined in focus to specific domains. Solution: adjusted TIII living lab
Research groups = diverse exchange of knowledge Possible risk: funding through projects
Adding UX consultancies to TIII network = offering companies deeper levels of expertise within specific design phases
WP 2.1 SOTA LABSLab matrix
Visual overview per phase on where we can utilise services/support from other labs and which services/support is still missing.
A variety of labs/organisations is active, within each phase of the TIII roadmap. (cooperation)
The TIII platform could complement by providing independent support to the affiliated companies within the final phase (preparing for production).
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
Objective of the method
Evaluate user experience of early TUI prototypes
!
Tangible User Interface = Physical + Interaction
1) Evaluate the physical aspects of TUIs
2) Evaluate interactive aspects of TUIs
!
How do physical aspects influence UX during interaction with TUI prototypes?
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
Apparatus
Interactive dice as a TUI
Interaction: Dice+ & tablet board game
Physical aspects: various physical casings
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
Phases of the method:
1. Exploration
2. Differentiation
3. Interaction
4. Combining physical & interactive experience
Participants:
9 participants (4 women, 5 men)
Age between 24 and 34 years old
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
1. Exploration
Goal
• Giving participants an overview of all prototypes
• Stimulating participants to describe their physical experience with their own words.
Focus = physical aspects
Procedure
• Participants explore the prototypes in a hands-on way
• No introduction or instructions (first impressions)
• ‘Think Aloud’ to verbalise their physical experiences
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
2. Differentiation
Goal
• Eliciting words used by participants to describe their physical experience
Focus = physical aspects
Procedure
• Present the prototypes in series of three
• Participants make a differentiation between these three prototypes
• Differentiation is converted into constructs and contrasts
• Repeat until all prototypes are mutually compared
Contrast B1
Contrast B2 Construct A2
Construct A3 Contrast B3
Construct A1
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
3. Evaluating interaction
Goal:
• How do users experience interaction with the different prototypes?
Focus = interactional aspects
Procedure:
Participants interact with all of the prototypes one by one (in random sequences) and are asked to ‘Think Aloud’ to share their experiences.
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
4. Combining physical & interactive experience
Goal:
• Creating a qualitative link between users’ physical and interactive experience
• Focus = physical + interactional aspects
Procedure:
• Participants divide construct/contrast according to preference (based on both physical + interactive experience)
• Participants mark each prototype with the applicable constructs or contrasts
• Finally, participants rank the prototypes, based on both physical and interactive experience
Construct A1
Construct A2
Construct A3
Construct A3
X
X
X
0
0
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
0
0
X
0
0
X
X
X
Preferred0
Contrast B1
Contrast B2
Contrast B3
Contrast B3
Not preferredX
3 421 5 6
WP 2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF A TUI UX EVALUATION METHOD
4. Combining physical & interactive experience
Outcome:
Qualitative data about the influence of different physical aspects (shape, weight, texture, material, size) on the user’s overall experience with a Tangible User Interface
Construct A1
Construct A2
Construct A3
Construct A3
X
X
X
0
0
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
0
0
X
0
0
X
X
X
Preferred0
Contrast B1
Contrast B2
Contrast B3
Contrast B3
Not preferredX
3 421 5 6
WP 4.3 SUPERVISING STUDENT CASES WITH COMPANIES/ORGANISATIONS
Guest lecture on user research and UX evaluation methods
!
!
Supporting students in collaboration with VRT
WP 5.3 GIVING WORKSHOPS, SEMINARS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF TIII
Presenting the TUI UX evaluation method for the consortium
Workshop with CUO | Social Spaces for the development of TUI UX evaluation method
WP 5.1 PUBLICATIONS
Currently finishing full paper submission for CHI 2015 conference in Seoul
WiP paper presented by poster at TEI 2014 conference in Munich
Workshop participation CHI 2014on tactile user experience evaluation methods